The opponents claimed that the city had not been in compliance with the acts. In addition to those legal complaints, some business owners situated along the project site complained that construction had curbed business. The court's order did not make any mention of business impact.

The group, however, specifically targeted the acts, contending that the city had not complied with NEPA and the National Historic Preservation Act. It then had sought to block further action on the ART projection until the city complied with the acts.

The 10th U.S. District Court of Appeals disagreed.

The group had also appealed both the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction and its exclusion of two expert reports.

On Aug. 1, the court decided it needed more time to consider the appellants' motion and temporarily enjoined appellees from taking any action on the ART project until further notice.

The city requested a modification to allow the city to move ahead with non-destructive and pre-construction work. It was granted.

Based on its review, the court on Friday said that the group had not demonstrated that it is entitled to injunctive relief pending appeal.